[suzuki san]

Hi,

I have just fitted the Continental CC6 tyres Size : 165 x 70 x 14 on my 2016 WagonR Vxi AGS.
Fitted them on the original steel rim which I think is 4.5J size.
I am very happy with the upgrade. The ride is almost plush now and the acceleration feels faster - but I may be wrong on this. Ground clearance has also increased.
I also took this opportunity to fit a Sky Shop TPMS System which I bought from Amazon. Easy to fit the internal sensors and nice to have a readout on the dash. Works well. So far, so good.
Sold the old Apollo Amazer tyres 155 x 65 x 14 for Rs. 625 each. They were exactly 7 years old but not a single puncture.

[shancz]

Quite the thread I was looking for and thanks to all for sharing their valuable experiences

Background :
Our 2016 wagonR VXi (non ABS) on Apollo Amazer 3G 155/65 R14 is around 35k kms and should need a change of tyres by 40k.
Looking for slightly wider, comfier and quieter tyre with better grip than the apollos its currently shod with.

Situation :
It travels on bad roads and in city areas most of the time but soon the highway and hill miles will start increasing. It has already seen some punctures even on the apollo 3Gs and to avoid that I keep it at 36psi resulting in a harsh ride which I get complaints about.
At present, I am still ok with the ride at 32-33psi but not amazed by the grip of the apollo 3G.

Deduction :
Going through the thread I have zeroed in on 165/65 or 165/70 R14 on stock rims as the way forward and seems like on grip anything is better than the apollo 3Gs.

Concerns :
- I fear the Michelin XM2's will make life difficult due to the usage and resulting puncture situation.
- I feel JK Tyre, Goodyear, CEAT are similar or in some areas slightly below the apollos. Is it true or my assumption is wrong ?

At present my shortlist is :
1. MRF ZLX
2. Bridgestone B290
3. Continental CC6
4. Michelin XM2

Questions :
1. Which manufacturer-tyre(assuming different compounds are on offer) to go for ?
2. How much difference does it make to the ride between a 165/65 and a 165/70 tyre ? Is it of any significance at all in real world driving ?

Suggestions and corrections are welcome

Originally Posted by suzuki san

I have just fitted the Continental CC6 tyres Size : 165 x 70 x 14 on my 2016 WagonR Vxi AGS.

Congrats, let us know your experience so far and if possible could you share a pic with the new tyres ?

[ashis89]

Originally Posted by shancz

Quite the thread I was looking for and thanks to all for sharing their valuable experiences

If your running will continue to be 5k/year then avoid soft compound tyres like Michelin as they tend to disintegrate over time due to non-usage.

165/70 will be comfier than 165/65 but will come at the cost of extra body roll too. The ride quality and the body roll(on the highway) do make a difference in daily driving. You get almost an extra cm of side wall height with the 70 profile over 65. 165/70 is a more common size and hence the tyres are significantly cheaper than 65 profile ones.

MRF ZLX is a comfort oriented tyre, per my experience.

[shancz]

Originally Posted by ashis89

- If your running will continue to be 5k/year then avoid soft compound tyres like Michelin as they tend to disintegrate over time due to non-usage.

- You get almost an extra cm of side wall height with the 70 profile over 65.

- Thanks for the heads up, will skip the soft compounds. Usage will change in nature but might remain the same in distance travelled and might actually decrease 2-3 years down the line.

- Understood, body roll is already a concern especially when switching cars. I would rather stick to 165/65 which is already 7mm taller than the 155/65 I have. Not really concerned about price as its a once in a 6-8 year expense and it would really help the comfort during longer drives.

Since you've tried both the Yokohama Earth 1 and the MRF ZLX, if you have to get a new set for your car then what would it be ?

From what I gather my requirements would be best met by a 165/65 comfort oriented tyre like the MRF ZLX with the Bridgestone B290 as the second option unless you recommend anything else.

I recently drove an i20 Elite shod with new B290s on highways and hills for 350kms and it was good. Although it could just have been the car so cannot consider it as solid evidence.

[ashis89]

Originally Posted by shancz

- Understood, body roll is already a concern especially when switching cars. I would rather stick to 165/65 which is already 7mm taller than the 155/65 I have.
Since you've tried both the Yokohama Earth 1 and the MRF ZLX, if you have to get a new set for your car then what would it be ?

I am happy with the ZLX as my father is the primary user and that too within the city. When I had got that tyre set, I already knew the upcoming use case and chose the MRF. If I was the primary user and the car were to see highways frequently, I would go with Earth 1 for sure or maybe try out Continental. The Yoko allowed me to push the bread box on the highway and ghats, and I respect them for that feat.

Regarding the reduced grip and higher body roll, I know this because I have a benchmark of using a set of Yokos earlier. While upgrading from Amazer to ZLX, one might not notice these cons but will appreciate the better silent ride.

I hope to have confused you further.

[shancz]

Originally Posted by ashis89

I hope to have confused you further.

Quite the opposite and Thank You for your prompt replies.

My situation is also similar to yours. My father owns the car and is the primary user(hence I always use "our wagonR") and that's how its going to stay till 2024 when he retires. After that the regular city usage will drop to miniscule amounts and highway might increase but that's not confirmed as my father doesn't like highways and wagonR in the same sentence mainly due to the harsh rear seat ride and road noise.

If I was the primary driver then the Michelins would've been the go to option or the Yokohama/Continental just to try them out.

So the 165/65 R14 MRF ZLX seems apt in my case with the alternate being the Bridgestone B290.
Will update when the tyre change happens, 4-5k kms from now.

Thanks a lot for your help

[shancz]

Originally Posted by ashis89

Regarding the reduced grip and higher body roll, I know this because I have a benchmark of using a set of Yokos earlier. While upgrading from Amazer to ZLX, one might not notice these cons but will appreciate the better silent ride.

Just one more question, with the 165/70 profile that you're running now, any incidents of tyre-wheel well contact during turning or a loaded car going over bumps?
Or do you foresee any such situation ?

[ashis89]

Originally Posted by shancz

Just one more question, with the 165/70 profile that you're running now, any incidents of tyre-wheel well contact during turning or a loaded car going over bumps?
Or do you foresee any such situation ?

Our car is running on 165/65 profile. No scraping of wheel wells under any condition or load.

[shancz]

Originally Posted by ashis89

Our car is running on 165/65 profile. No scraping of wheel wells under any condition or load.

Thanks for the info, I might consider the 165/70 too.
Just got a chance to sit in the rear seat and a taller sidewall would certainly be welcome. This ride made it clear that comfort would be the primary objective of the next change and
I also see a flaw in the reasoning of 165/65 over the 165/70 and paying significantly more(25-30%) when the objective is to increase comfort.

In my mind I would either go with 165/70 R14 or keep stock.
Makes are still ZLX, B290, CC6 in order and based on availability. Poor dealer situation with Continental in Ranchi would make the CC6 as the last and an online purchase only option.

Thanks for your help and will update when the change happens.

[shancz]

Originally Posted by shancz

I also see a flaw in the reasoning of 165/65 over the 165/70 and paying significantly more(25-30%) when the objective is to increase comfort.

And the counter to this argument is breaching the 2.5% upsize limit. This one has me in a fix

On a side note the change will happen before the rainy season starts as the tread would've worn down to the TWI on at least 2 tyres and almost touching in the other two.

Originally Posted by ashis89

Our car is running on 165/65 profile.

Another fix I have is the spare wheel. I have followed a 4 tyre rotation regime in the past 20k kms that I was around and as a result the spare has been barely used.
Now it feels like a waste to get rid of an almost new spare.
My question is if I keep the spare as is would it have any significant impact when used with 165/65 or 165/70 tyre for a limited period ? Don't the space saver tyres follow the same principle?

[ashis89]

Originally Posted by shancz

My question is if I keep the spare as is would it have any significant impact when used with 165/65 or 165/70 tyre for a limited period ? Don't the space saver tyres follow the same principle?

There won't be any issue if you are using a slightly smaller wheel for a short period of time and preferably within low speeds. That said I had to use a smaller spare only once, and that too for 10 kms due to a faulty tyre valve. Never ever had a flat tyre during the 60k kms.

[humans]

Originally Posted by shancz

Thanks for the info, I might consider the 165/70 too.

Did you changed the tires? How is the ride, and is 165/70 hitting sidewall?

I have to change my stock tires from size 155/65 R14. Not able to decide between 165/65 R14, with which the deviation is kind of very less compared to when going with 165/70 R14.

Any recommendation from tyre experts will be much appreciated.

[shancz]

Originally Posted by humans

- Did you changed the tires?
I have to change my stock tires from size 155/65 R14.

- Not able to decide between 165/65 R14, with which the deviation is kind of very less compared to when going with 165/70 R14.

- Not yet, current ones still have 3-4k left on them. Was thinking of changing before monsoons but might not be around then. So most likely by end of year or early next year.

- That's my confusion too but I thought of either keeping stock size or 165/70 for max comfort. 165/65 is an ideal step up but it has two major factors to consider IMO. One is that the standard 4.5J rims have a maximum supported width of 165. What does it mean in real life, I don't know but members seem to have no issues so it's a green for me. Second and probably more important is the cost. 165/65 are dearer by roughly 800 - 1000₹ over either the 155/65 or 165/70.
I have postponed this decision to the time when I have to get the tyres, will physically see the difference between the tyres in real life and then take a call.

With the 165/70 the deviation is almost 5% which is twice that of 165/65. The latter is a safer and and more versatile upgrade without a doubt albeit a bit expensive.

[PetroHeadRig]

Originally Posted by suzuki san

Hi Petro Head,

How is your Waggie doing on the new tyres of 165 x 70 x 14 size. I am planning to stick to the original steel wheels and fit Continental tyres of the size you did. Any issues with scraping the wheel wells or any other issues?

Thanks & Regards,
SS

No issues at all. Ground Clearance has slightly improved but Body roll has increased a bit. Also,It's less stable than before.
Cheers